Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 85

2010 SS vs bolt on 02 WS6

This is a discussion on 2010 SS vs bolt on 02 WS6 within the Kill Stories forums, part of the Racing Forums category; Originally Posted by Firebirdjones Ya that was then and this is now as in my point being the 5th gen ...

  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    Ya that was then and this is now as in my point being the 5th gen should have cost more than $30K now,,,,my hats off to GM for offering the car at prices our 4th gens were selling for 10 years ago.

    People paid that much for a 4th gen and didn't get as much of a car back then as you can now, looking at the big picture. A cars speed shouldn't be the only measure when looking to purchase something, because that alone is easily altered. If that's the logic of thinking here then why bother to own a 4th gen now when the prices of C5 vettes are reasonable to own.
    Well imo I think its ugly, so thats the first reason I wouldnt buy one. I also hate the fact that the car is pushing 4,000 lbs. What is the logic in making it such a pig? Whatever though. Im happy with my car.

  2. #42
    Senior Member big hammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    manitoba, canada
    Posts
    1,731

    silver
    2002 ws6

    on a lighter note, i blew 4th, never bothered to get it in, and still rolled past the quarter in front

  3. #43
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by big hammer View Post
    this is the same way--- 4th seems off to the side a bit--- almost too close to 2nd for comfort
    That's interesting. Glad to see someone else with the same issue, even if it is a different brand.

  4. #44
    Senior Member big hammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    manitoba, canada
    Posts
    1,731

    silver
    2002 ws6

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike0202 View Post
    Well imo I think its ugly, so thats the first reason I wouldnt buy one. I also hate the fact that the car is pushing 4,000 lbs. What is the logic in making it such a pig? Whatever though. Im happy with my car.
    they are heavy--- and i love my ws6. but the new camaro drives quite a bit nicer and alot more solid... my only complaint is it needs to be faster (obviously) and the front and rear windows are a little small

  5. #45

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    Too hard to put exact numbers down with varying dynos, but the LS family of motors are healthy in stock form to say the least.
    You dont need exact numbers but 300rwh isnt even close to 400bhp. The highest I have ever seen a stock ls1 dyno was 327 with just a lid. No offense, I just dont see anyway one could hit 400 stock. But id love to be proven wrong.

  6. #46
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike0202 View Post
    Well imo I think its ugly, so thats the first reason I wouldnt buy one. I also hate the fact that the car is pushing 4,000 lbs. What is the logic in making it such a pig? Whatever though. Im happy with my car.
    I don't mean to stick up for the 5th gens, I don't like them either. I thought GM missed the mark on the styling. But it seems to be a hit though, as it's already outsold the mustang this year.
    Weight doesn't bother me although it was inevitable with the new cars, with all the bells and whistles everyone wants or needs, and of course the crash/impact safety devices built in. With all that considered they aren't really that heavy in comparison to our 4th gens.

  7. #47
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike0202 View Post
    You dont need exact numbers but 300rwh isnt even close to 400bhp. The highest I have ever seen a stock ls1 dyno was 327 with just a lid. No offense, I just dont see anyway one could hit 400 stock. But id love to be proven wrong.
    300 won't be close to 400, when you figure drivetrain loss and other variables like correction factors. The only certain way to get solid numbers would be to pull the motor out of an existing car after a chassis dyno pull. I only mentioned what was published from a new GM crate LS1. With varying chassis dyno's such as a mustang or dyno jet,,,there are also varying engine dyno's, some are happy and some aren't. We used a DTS which was very conservative, just like the one you see at the engine masters challenge.

  8. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    300 won't be close to 400, when you figure drivetrain loss and other variables like correction factors. The only certain way to get solid numbers would be to pull the motor out of an existing car after a chassis dyno pull. I only mentioned what was published from a new GM crate LS1. With varying chassis dyno's such as a mustang or dyno jet,,,there are also varying engine dyno's, some are happy and some aren't. We used a DTS which was very conservative, just like the one you see at the engine masters challenge.
    Track numbers usually tell the story. The average time for a stock ls1 is probably around 13.3 at 105-107 in a 3400-3500 lb car. That alone shows there underrated.

  9. #49
    Senior Member bluehawk2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Hickory, NC
    Age
    28
    Posts
    1,492

    midnight blue
    2000 trans am

    stock ls1's even at the flywheel is not putting down 400 horsepower lol, you done lost your dern mind if you think so. But everybody can have their overrated opinions to thats whats great about this country and whats wrong with it at the same time.

  10. #50
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike0202 View Post
    Track numbers usually tell the story. The average time for a stock ls1 is probably around 13.3 at 105-107 in a 3400-3500 lb car. That alone shows there underrated.
    That's why I never got into the chest pounding over dyno numbers, they can be somewhat misleading. I use them for tuning purposes only, period. Don't care what HP the car makes, it's the track numbers in the end that count for us.

  11. #51
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by bluehawk2000 View Post
    stock ls1's even at the flywheel is not putting down 400 horsepower lol, you done lost your dern mind if you think so. But everybody can have their overrated opinions to thats whats great about this country and whats wrong with it at the same time.
    Then prove them wrong. I'm only stating what many people have found on an engine dyno with a stock crate engine. You don't believe it, then go buy a crate motor and find yourself a dyno.

    Just for comparison, my bone stock 70 formula 400 factory rated at 345hp made 392 hp on an engine dyno and 460 ft lbs. of torque.
    Once in the car on a chassis dyno it made 301 hp and 355 ft lbs. of torque.
    Pretty big spread, but you have to consider the engine was only turning the water pump on the engine dyno and it's in a controlled atmosphere with a carb hat,,,,in the car it's turning an alternator, power steering pump, sucking air through the factory air cleaner, the atmoshere isn't controlled as in a dyno room, it's pushing through a stock exhaust system as installed on the car,,,,then factor in pushing through the transmission, driveshaft, rearend, and moving the tires as well.

    It's easy to see the difference when you've been around this stuff for a long time.

  12. #52
    Senior Member big hammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    manitoba, canada
    Posts
    1,731

    silver
    2002 ws6

    Quote Originally Posted by bluehawk2000 View Post
    stock ls1's even at the flywheel is not putting down 400 horsepower lol, you done lost your dern mind if you think so. But everybody can have their overrated opinions to thats whats great about this country and whats wrong with it at the same time.
    dynos can be made to tell you anything you want--- for example my cousin somhow managed to get 415hp out of a full bolt on 3v stang..... he was so excited--- i didn't have the heart to tell him he's been had.

  13. #53
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee
    Posts
    3,260

    Arctic White, red/gray
    1997 Corvette, 92 Typhoon

    Quote Originally Posted by big hammer View Post
    dynos can be made to tell you anything you want--- for example my cousin somhow managed to get 415hp out of a full bolt on 3v stang..... he was so excited--- i didn't have the heart to tell him he's been had.
    Its true, but in my experience a stock ls1 makes 350-360 crank.

  14. #54
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by big hammer View Post
    dynos can be made to tell you anything you want--- for example my cousin somhow managed to get 415hp out of a full bolt on 3v stang..... he was so excited--- i didn't have the heart to tell him he's been had.
    Those little mod motors can be impressive. Have you seen the latest article in Popular Hotrodding?

    They chassis dyno'd a stock mod motor mustang (sohc) and backed each session up with track times. Although even after cams, porting the cylinder heads, 4.10 gears, etc....they could only still muster low 13's and made something like 280 rwhp. But as soon as they took that crappy fuel injected intake off and installed a victor jr. and 650 dp the engine picked up a mind boggling 100 hp. They backed that up with the car dropping into the 11.70 zone. And eventually switching to camshafts that compliment a carb application the times dropped into the bottom 11's. Not bad for a little mod motor, gotta watch out for those when someone has installed a carb on it.

  15. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee
    Posts
    3,260

    Arctic White, red/gray
    1997 Corvette, 92 Typhoon

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    Those little mod motors can be impressive. Have you seen the latest article in Popular Hotrodding?

    They chassis dyno'd a stock mod motor mustang (sohc) and backed each session up with track times. Although even after cams, porting the cylinder heads, 4.10 gears, etc....they could only still muster low 13's and made something like 280 rwhp. But as soon as they took that crappy fuel injected intake off and installed a victor jr. and 650 dp the engine picked up a mind boggling 100 hp. They backed that up with the car dropping into the 11.70 zone. And eventually switching to camshafts that compliment a carb application the times dropped into the bottom 11's. Not bad for a little mod motor, gotta watch out for those when someone has installed a carb on it.
    Lol, im sure the make a intake manfold and injector setup that could yield simular results. And 300whp aint nothing like the 415whp his friend said he got on a bolt on 3 valve. Almos noone i know would swap a carb on that car for a street engine. Less mpg, and who wants a street car setup to run great in only nice dry weather.

  16. #56
    Senior Member big hammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    manitoba, canada
    Posts
    1,731

    silver
    2002 ws6

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    Those little mod motors can be impressive. Have you seen the latest article in Popular Hotrodding?

    They chassis dyno'd a stock mod motor mustang (sohc) and backed each session up with track times. Although even after cams, porting the cylinder heads, 4.10 gears, etc....they could only still muster low 13's and made something like 280 rwhp. But as soon as they took that crappy fuel injected intake off and installed a victor jr. and 650 dp the engine picked up a mind boggling 100 hp. They backed that up with the car dropping into the 11.70 zone. And eventually switching to camshafts that compliment a carb application the times dropped into the bottom 11's. Not bad for a little mod motor, gotta watch out for those when someone has installed a carb on it.
    well geez that's not bad--- but if the fuelie intake was that restrictive you would think they could make a better one

  17. #57
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by Zinergy View Post
    Lol, im sure the make a intake manfold and injector setup that could yield simular results. And 300whp aint nothing like the 415whp his friend said he got on a bolt on 3 valve. Almos noone i know would swap a carb on that car for a street engine. Less mpg, and who wants a street car setup to run great in only nice dry weather.
    I believe after the carb swap the engine made close to 400 rwhp as verified on the dyno and then strip testing afterwards. You aren't going to run bottom 11's at 120+ mph in a full weight mustang with just 300 rwhp.

    The only fuel injected setup I'm aware of that works that well on the mod motors are aftermarket victor jr. intakes that use an elbow and bungs welded for injectors. Basically taking the carb off.
    Carbs don't necessarily mean less mpg either, and they run great in all weather conditions. That's an old stereo type from people that don't know how to tune carbs, a sad lost art nowadays.
    Speaking of fuel injection,,, It will be interesting to see the engine master challenge this year, as they have changed the rules to allow fuel injection as well as LS platforms. But I'm willing to bet "MOST" will stay with the carbs, as it's been shown many times over that a good intake/carb setup makes a bit more peak HP.

  18. #58
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by big hammer View Post
    well geez that's not bad--- but if the fuelie intake was that restrictive you would think they could make a better one
    Ya I would have thought so. Have you ever looked at the sohc mod motor intake? That thing looks like a lump of spagetti sitting on top of the heads. What a mess that is, with runners going every direction.

    I'm not surprised that taking that off for a simple victor jr. and carb that it picked up alot,,,but 100 HP was an eye opener for sure. Even the ET's and MPH at the track showed it wasn't a fluke.

  19. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee
    Posts
    3,260

    Arctic White, red/gray
    1997 Corvette, 92 Typhoon

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    I believe after the carb swap the engine made close to 400 rwhp as verified on the dyno and then strip testing afterwards. You aren't going to run bottom 11's at 120+ mph in a full weight mustang with just 300 rwhp.

    The only fuel injected setup I'm aware of that works that well on the mod motors are aftermarket victor jr. intakes that use an elbow and bungs welded for injectors. Basically taking the carb off.
    Carbs don't necessarily mean less mpg either, and they run great in all weather conditions. That's an old stereo type from people that don't know how to tune carbs, a sad lost art nowadays.
    Speaking of fuel injection,,, It will be interesting to see the engine master challenge this year, as they have changed the rules to allow fuel injection as well as LS platforms. But I'm willing to bet "MOST" will stay with the carbs, as it's been shown many times over that a good intake/carb setup makes a bit more peak HP.

    Yes carbs can be tuned to run good in most conditions, but with todays tech why do you want to do tuning when your ecm can be setup to do it for you. If i go somewhere to eat and then race and the weather drops 15-20 degrees and i wanna race i need to do tuning to get the best out of my car. There are alot of days in WI that the weather changes way more than a 20 degree swing. Its 1 less PITA to worry about. Like drumb brakes

  20. #60
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by Zinergy View Post
    Yes carbs can be tuned to run good in most conditions, but with todays tech why do you want to do tuning when your ecm can be setup to do it for you. If i go somewhere to eat and then race and the weather drops 15-20 degrees and i wanna race i need to do tuning to get the best out of my car. There are alot of days in WI that the weather changes way more than a 20 degree swing. Its 1 less PITA to worry about. Like drumb brakes

    Carbs aren't really that finicky. I moved from Ohio out here to Prescott 5,300 feet up in the air. Cars went to running rich but I have them dialed in now. Just a few hours with the wideband and it was done. Now I drive them around at over 5,000 feet but have to race at 1200 feet.
    I can go down near sea level to race the car and simply change the high speed air bleeds ( takes 2 minutes ) and the AFR is good to go. Come back up the hill and stick the other air bleeds in. I don't even have to touch the jets. It's not as bad as people make it out to be.

    Even the fuel injected cars need the WOT retuned with big swings like that. I have had to retune both of our 4th gens. Without software you are stuck paying someone else to do it.

    Hey, don't knock my drum brakes, they are awesome

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 2010 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2010 Ford Saleen Mustang - Ponycar
    By Ed Blown Vert in forum Almost Anything Goes
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-10-2010, 04:30 PM
  2. 2011 Mustang V-6 vs 2010 Genesis Coupe vs 2010 Cam
    By trev0006 in forum Camaro / SS
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 04-21-2010, 09:02 PM
  3. 2010 Camaro Performance Parts - New Camaro Bolt-On
    By Ed Blown Vert in forum Almost Anything Goes
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-10-2009, 10:50 PM
  4. 2010 Chevy Camaro V6 LT vs 2010 Hyundai Genesis Co
    By trev0006 in forum Camaro / SS
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 05-11-2009, 02:24 PM
  5. Center bolt to Perimeter bolt Heads, Coil Mounting help
    By juiced99ws6 in forum Internal Engine
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-31-2007, 12:38 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •